Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: How To Ask College To Change Intro To Computing?
First time accepted submitter taz346 writes "I got a Bachelor's degree 30 years ago, but I recently started back to college to get an Associate's degree. Most of the core courses are already covered by my B.A. but one that I didn't take way back when was Introduction to Computing. I am taking that now but have been very disappointed to find that it is really just Introduction to Microsoft Office 2010. That's actually the name of the (very expensive) textbook. It is mindless, boring and pretty useless for someone who's used PCs for about 20 years. But beyond that, why does it have to be all about MS Office and nothing else? Couldn't they just teach people to create documents, etc., and let them use any office software, like Libre Office? It seems to me that would be more useful; students would learn how to actually create things on their computers, not just follow step-by-step commands from a dumbed-down book about one piece of increasingly expensive software. I know doing it the way they do now is easy for the college, but it's not really teaching students much about what they can do with computers. So when the class is over, I plan to write a letter to the college asking them to change the course as I suggested above. I'm not real hopeful, but what the heck. Do folks out there have any good suggestions as to what might be the most persuasive arguments I can make?"
We learned Claris Works... get the credits and get over it. Your experience is much more valuable than a cheap course, use it.
Tomorrow is another day...
Is that a lot of CSci depts (particularly at community colleges and other places that have associate's degrees) across the country have received grant money from Microsoft itself. That will, of course, make it much more difficult for you to convince them to stop "teaching" Microsoft Office.
I would highly recommend you look into that possibility before you start writing a letter, because if that is the case at your school then you'll just be tilting at windmills.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
My college has "Prior Learning Assessment". If you already know the stuff, they will test you and you can be exempted from taking the class.
Don't waste your time on a worthless class if you can avoid it.
What does a credit hour cost?
How many students are going to be ripped off? What percentage of those already learned this in high school or junior high?
It's institutionalized theft. I'm amazed you are so sanguine about it.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
I'd simply point out that UK high schools have surpassed their intro course and ask them at what point they plan to give you a better education in computers than a foreign government can give its kids.
;-)
If you really wanted to go the extra mile and spend a little bit of money on this "letter" you could buy a small SD flash card and spend $25 on a Raspberry Pi and work through this tutorial as you work through your intro course. Then when you're done you can get the Raspberry Pi to start and have the sole purpose be to display your letter to the staff. Just mail them the Raspberry Pi, the flash card, a USB to USB Micro cord and a short HDMI cable. Just write instructions to plug it into a USB port and monitor then in the letter explain how you used the GNU Toolchain and wrote the rest of this code yourself. It might be too much for some of the other students but it was cheaper than the textbook. If you can do it then your once great alma mater is selling its students short.
A letter can be crumpled up and thrown away. A Raspberry Pi can as well but I guarantee it's going to hurt like hell
My work here is dung.
When I was taking courses for my associate degree for information technology, I had to take a similar bullshit course for MS Orifice.. er.. Office.
I asked several of the school administrators why such a clearly nonsense class was required for (what at the time) was a fairly hard-core curriculum featuring CISCO CCNA certification training, A+&Network+ cert training, Novell Netware cert training, Database Programming, and general programming courseware.
The answer, was that they had been pressured into it, because of requirements for in-house tech staff to be more than just proficient with MS's offerings, but be sufficiently fluent in the packages that they can provide quick and rapid responces to support questions from less technical office workers.
Essentially, they need/want you to be able to "help" the vacuous "office marys" out there tha can't quite remember how to use the mail/merge feature, despite using it EVERY SINGLE DAY.
(Compare, that would be like a programmer not remembering how to use a macro, or how to call a library, THAT THEY WROTE, and use every day-- and need a programming specialist to help them debug their output... because of their abysmal level of incompetence.)
Really, in that light, the requirement to have MS's office suite s an intro level class makes sense, in a horrible and twisted way.
More sense would be to have a competency test for office workers, but that would exclude a considerable number of office staff that are employed due to nepotism. Instead, and expensive support network is required to ensure that such employees are halfass productive.
Yes, it is less intense than a 4 year CS or Math degree, where you learn things like mathematical theory, and get exposed to much more advanced problems.
Submitter specifically mentioned an associate degree. I took classes in said associate degree not because I wanted the degree, but because I was interested in the cert training. (The school offered discounted cert testing as part of the course.)
The point was that those benchwarmer classes were leaps and bounds moe "technical" than "how to change the font to bold in MS Word."
Specifically, that AS degree was for a computer support role. That's why the intro to computing was more "wordprocessing", and less "computational theory", which would have been more sensible. (You know, things like "introduction to turing machines", and things like the difference between harvard and von-neuman architectures.)
I am pretty sure it was more on topic than your shit smearing attempt. --no offense intended.
But beyond that, why does it have to be all about MS Office and nothing else? Couldn't they just teach people to create documents, etc., and let them use any office software, like Libre Office?
We tried this at the last school I was at. If by the time you get to university you can't create a document in word, you're not going to learn to use libre office in 12 weeks. We have to teach behaviours before we can expect much understanding, and a course textbook that is about MS office is decidedly at the level of giving basic behaviours without underlying principles.
The problem with people who are completely computer illiterate is that high minded ideas about teaching them 'principles' is a step ahead of them, at least by the time they're university or college age. They're scared of breaking anything, and you're jumping the gun asking for more than that.
I know doing it the way they do now is easy for the college, but it's not really teaching students much about what they can do with computers.
Nor is that the point. If the course is a book in Office the class is targeted at people who know next to nothing and trying to get them to the point of accomplishing basic tasks that will be useful in university.
So when the class is over, I plan to write a letter to the college asking them to change the course as I suggested above. I'm not real hopeful
Nor should you be. It's not a good idea. We can seat 400 kids in a class about how to use MS word whereas the next largest CS course is 120, with an entrance class in science of about 6000. Exceptionally basic classes are popular because so many students know next to nothing. The Deans office likes these classes because they put seats in chairs, the other science departments like us because their TA's don't have to cover basic things like how to do bullet points in a document, etc. It's sad, but this is the reality of computer literacy. Complaining to the dean is just going to make you unpopular with the department because you're trying to make people look bad, when absolutely everyone knows how pathetic it is that this is required. But you can't control worldwide highschool curriculum.
Look, I realize you're trying to help. But you're not. You're in the wrong class. It's that simple. If your university/college has an actual computer science programme absolutely no one in that department, who is running the course, thinks this is the level we really want students to be at. But you have to realize we still get foreign students who've never lived with regular electricity, and most of the domestic ones basically open word and start mashing buttons to type, they don't actually know anything. These are exceptionally basic courses because the people coming in are at an exceptionally basic level, and that's the market that needs to be served. It shouldn't be a university level credit, but no one would take it if we only gave a college level credit for it (they have other things to spend time on), and that means it attracts people looking for some free easy marks, there's no way to avoid that, but for the people who actually need this level of material (which is a lot of students, and a lot more who don't even realize they need this level of material) what you're suggesting is completely disconnected from their reality.
Do folks out there have any good suggestions as to what might be the most persuasive arguments I can make?"
Literally the only argument is that students shouldn't need this in the first place, which isn't even true. Everything else is you just living in a bubble of 'first world problems' so to speak.
We, I kid you not, have students majoring in computer science and electrical engineering where I am that grew up without electricity, and their first plane flight was to come here. It's mostly a India/China/Africa thing, but it's rare that someone from China or india hasn't had at le
College should prepare them for future employment.
Wrong. That's the job of a vocational school. Granted, submitter's getting an associates, so it's closer to a career-oriented degree than not. Irrespective, two or four years should merely be differenciated by the depth of knowledge in a particular field, not the breadth of knowledge overall.
College is about education. Education does not have a pure application, in the same sense that abstract mathematics and partical physics don't have pure applications. In fact, it should not. Education begins with the fundamentals. Fundamentals don't change no matter what the application. They're the default information, the fallback, safe knowledge, when there's no additional information known. Then, it's learning about the exceptions to the fundamentals, where the fundamentals don't apply, or don't necessarily apply. Finally, it's learning about the unresolved exceptions, and approaches of resolving them. The area of unresolved exceptions is the limits of knowledge, and where the old knowledge ends and new knowledge will be created. Examples should be used only to illustrate the concepts taught. Examples should never be the knowledge being taught.
Teaching MS Office is not intro to computers. Teaching the difference between a spreadsheet and a database, a text editor and a word processor, is. Teaching what a program is, what it means to install a program versus what it means to run a program (without or after installing) is.
Teaching the concept of a shortcut or link is. How to use MS Office is more appropriate for one of their career-based, continuing education-type classes. It's like teaching how to use a Canon 5D Mk III with a 14mm F2.8 prime, instead of what is the field of view or what the F-stop means. Or for a car analogy, it's teaching how to change the motor oil of a 1996 Honda Accord instead of what motor oil actually does and why it needs to be changed at all. Those kinds of classes don't belong in a degree program.
That having been said, any respectable institution has ways to test out of prerequisites. Otherwise, it's just a scam to make you pay more tuition. This wouldn't happen to be the University of Phoenix or some other for-profit, would it?
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
... I *was* a kid at the time. That was the point. This was close to 20 years ago, in the 90s. I don't list them, especially now.
I no longer work in any IT related disciplines, I am a CAD draftsman. It ca be dull and drudgery at times, but that is true of any job. Not having to answer questions because "you're a computer guy, right?" Is well worth it, as is the radically reduced levels of stress.
It would be nonsense to claim those certs on a resume.
It wasn't nonsense to claim them when I was 18. For the submitter, who has been in the industry previously, A+, Network+, and CCNA would be wastes of money and time as well, since vocationally he should have become proficient already, and the cert means nothing. They however, less rediculous than the MS office requirement, for exactly the same reasons. Expecting somebody that has likely *already* been supporting office users vocationally to take an intro to office class is not just silly, it is minbogglingly mindshatteringly silly.
I believe that was the submitter's point, in addition to the obvious that computers are not glorified typewriters.